Probabilistic Seismic Assessment of RC Bridges: Part II — Nonlinear Demand Prediction

Abstract One of the most determinant components of any seismic safety assessment procedure is the estimate of the nonlinear seismic demand, particularly if such procedure is probabilistic rather than deterministic. Indeed, the prediction of the seismic demand of RC structures is dictated by a number of variables, related to the seismic action or to the geometrical and material properties, with different relevancy and uncertainty levels. From a macro-viewpoint one can distinguish the different approaches for nonlinear demand prediction in two major groups: nonlinear static and dynamic. Whereas the latter is widely recognised as the most accurate approach, the former, particularly by means of nonlinear static procedures (NSPs), represents a valid alternative tool for performance-based seismic assessment of structures, quite accepted among the scientific community worldwide. Significant effort has therefore been made, over the past few years, to improve those simplified methods and several different proposals in terms of application methodology have come up. Simultaneously, validation studies have thoroughly been carried out, even though focusing mainly on regular, building structures, rather than typically irregular bridges, and have focused the validation through the direct comparison of response prediction. The capability of such procedures within a probabilistic framework that yields the collapse probability of randomly sampled RC viaducts is herein investigated. A commonly employed nonlinear static procedure (N2) is further validated against nonlinear dynamic analysis using two distinct probabilistic procedures, described and tested in a companion paper, which account differently for the uncertainty of the concerned variables (geometry, material properties, earthquake records, intensity level). A case study of seven bridge configurations, with different (ir)regularity levels, is considered together with a relatively large set of real earthquake records and random simulation is carried out using the Latin Hypercube Sampling scheme. The conclusions have further probed the suitability of nonlinear static analysis in estimating seismic demand by leading, under probabilistic conditions, to slightly conservative probabilities of collapse of RC bridges with respect to nonlinear dynamic analysis.

[1]  Rui Pinho,et al.  DEVELOPMENT AND VERIFICATION OF A DISPLACEMENT-BASED ADAPTIVE PUSHOVER PROCEDURE , 2004 .

[2]  Casarotti Chiara,et al.  Seismic response of continuous span bridges through fiber-based finite element analysis , 2006 .

[3]  Rui Pinho,et al.  Evaluation of Nonlinear Static Procedures in the Assessment of Building Frames , 2013 .

[4]  Rui Pinho,et al.  IMPROVED FRAGILITY FUNCTIONS FOR RC BRIDGE POPULATIONS , 2015 .

[5]  Aníbal Costa Análise sísmica de estruturas irregulares , 1990 .

[6]  Rui Pinho,et al.  Assessment of Continuous Span Bridges through Nonlinear Static Procedures , 2009 .

[7]  Andreas J. Kappos,et al.  PERFORMANCE-BASED SEISMIC DESIGN OF 3D R/C BUILDINGS USING INELASTIC STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSIS PROCEDURES , 2004 .

[8]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings , 2002 .

[9]  Bilal M. Ayyub,et al.  Structural Reliability Assessment Using Latin Hypercube Sampling , 1990 .

[10]  Peter Fajfar,et al.  A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Performance-Based Seismic Design , 2000 .

[11]  Andreas J. Kappos,et al.  Extension of modal pushover analysis to seismic assessment of bridges , 2006 .

[12]  Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,et al.  Incremental dynamic analysis , 2002 .

[13]  Sashi K. Kunnath,et al.  Adaptive Modal Combination Procedure for Nonlinear Static Analysis of Building Structures , 2006 .

[14]  Davide Forcellini,et al.  Performance based earthquake engineering approach applied to bridges in a road network , 2015 .

[15]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Advanced inelastic static (pushover) analysis for earthquake applications , 2001 .

[16]  Tatjana Isaković,et al.  Higher modes in simplified inelastic seismic analysis of single column bent viaducts , 2006 .

[17]  J. Bommer,et al.  THE EFFECTIVE DURATION OF EARTHQUAKE STRONG MOTION , 1999 .

[18]  Mário Lopes,et al.  Seismic performance of irregular bridges – comparison of different nonlinear static procedures , 2015 .

[19]  Rui Pinho,et al.  VERIFICATION OF SPECTRAL REDUCTION FACTORS FOR SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES , 2009 .

[20]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of a Modified MPA Procedure Assuming Higher Modes as Elastic to Estimate Seismic Demands , 2004 .

[21]  Ross B. Corotis,et al.  Building portfolio seismic loss assessment using the First-Order Reliability Method , 2015 .

[22]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  PROS AND CONS OF A PUSHOVER ANALYSIS OF SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION , 1998 .

[23]  Rui Pinho,et al.  An adaptive capacity spectrum method for assessment of bridges subjected to earthquake action , 2007 .

[24]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Inelastic analysis techniques in seismic evaluations , 2019, Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes.

[25]  M. Fardis,et al.  Designer's guide to EN 1998-1 and en 1998-5 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance; general rules, seismic actions, design rules for buildings, foundations and retaining structures/ M.Fardis[et al.] , 2005 .

[26]  Gian Michele Calvi,et al.  Adaptive pushover-based methods for seismic assessment and design of bridge structures , 2005 .

[27]  A. Olsson,et al.  On Latin hypercube sampling for structural reliability analysis , 2003 .

[28]  Rui Pinho,et al.  A comparison of single‐run pushover analysis techniques for seismic assessment of bridges , 2007 .

[29]  Mohtasham Mohebbi,et al.  Modified Adaptive Modal Combination Procedure for Nonlinear Static Analysis of Bridges , 2013 .

[30]  Humberto Varum Modelo numérico para a análise sísmica de pórticos planos de betão armado , 1995 .